Franchise Tax

Useful Resources for Franchise Tax

Recent Rulings on Franchise Tax

TANN V. HALEY

The court takes judicial notice that the California Secretary of State records establish that defendant GoldLine Brands, Inc. was suspended by the Franchise Tax Board. (See Plaintiff’s Exhibit 1 in Opposition.)

  • Hearing

    Jan 15, 2021

THE MORTGAGE LAW FIRM, PLC VS ALL CLAIMANTS TO SURPLUS PROCEEDS AFTER THE TRUSTEE'S SALE OF THE REAL PROPERTY

At the hearing on September 25, 2020, the court considered the further declarations and briefs that had been submitted and ruled that surplus funds in the sum of $52,900.28, plus interest in the sum of $4,046.00, were to be distributed to the State of California Franchise Tax Board, for a total distribution of $56,946.28 to the Franchise Tax Board on its claim.

  • Hearing

    Jan 15, 2021

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

RAYMOND FRANK BAEZ VS THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THE PEOPLE OF CALIFORNIA

(Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt (2019) 139 S. Ct. 1485.) Here, review of Plaintiff’s application for entry of the Illinois judgment shows that Plaintiff satisfied Code of Civil Procedure section 1710.15 (b)(1)(2),(4) and (6). But his application for entry of the Illinois judgment is otherwise defective in several respects. Of greatest significance, Plaintiff has not submitted a properly authenticated copy of the Illinois judgment purportedly made against the State of California.

  • Hearing

    Jan 14, 2021

DOLORES ELAINE BROWN VS JUAN JOSE TORRES GARCIA, ET AL.

TOPA Insurance Company (“TOPA”), at this time, moves for leave to intervene in the case, contending its insured, Tri-Area, is under a Franchise Tax Board suspension, and therefore, not able to conduct a defense on its behalf. Per CCP §387(a), permissive intervention is proper if: • The nonparty has a direct and immediate interest in the litigation; and • The intervention will not enlarge the issues in the case; and • The reasons for intervention outweigh any opposition by the existing parties.

  • Hearing

    Jan 14, 2021

IN THE MATTER OF JAMES R. OLSEN

Subject to statutory notice, it does not appear to the Court that the special administrator has filed an allowance or rejection of the creditor's claims filed by the Franchise Tax Board or Consumer Default Operations. (Prob. Code § 9250; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 7.401.) Discuss. The estate value is zero according to the inventory and appraisal filed on 7/10/20.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • Type

    Probate

  • Sub Type

    Trust

IN THE MATTER OF JODI G. JAWITZ

Administrator failed to indicate when notice to the Franchise Tax Board was given. (Probate Code §9202(c)) Petitioner fails to list the intestate heirs at ¶18. Petitioner lists the proposed distribution at ¶19, and provides a copy of a Grant Deed showing that decedent (after she was deceased) and Shari N. Faerman transferred the real property (decedent owned a ½ interest as a tenant in common) to Shari N. Faerman (retained her ½ interest) and 1/6 interest each to Jessica D. Jawitz, Adam D.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

NYAS WORLD LLC ET AL VS HRG TAX GROUP INC ET AL

It is undisputed that Trinity incurred $263.00 in penalties and interest due to the California Franchise Tax Board. (UMF 57.) Defendants assert that Plaintiff’s alleged consequential damages, including fees paid to Defendants for work not performed and attorney fees and CPA fees to correct errors, have nothing to do with Trinity and were not paid by Trinity. (Motion at p. 21.) But Defendants do not explain why these are unrelated to Trinity.

  • Hearing

    Jan 12, 2021

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

ESTATE OF RODNEY LEE CARLES

No such document was filed. 2) Notice to Franchise Tax Board. Notice MUST have been given to the Franchise Tax Board not later than 90 days after the date letters are first issued. (Prob. Code, § 9202, subd. (c)(1).) 3) Proposed Order. A proposed order must be submitted with relief that matches that requested in the petition. (Local Rule 1724(b), subd.(d).) Order must list every beneficiary and detail the shares to each, and must expressly state limitations or conditions on distribution. (Prob.

  • Hearing

    Jan 11, 2021

  • Judge Jed Beebe
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

MARSH HIGUERA MIXED USE, LLC ET AL. V. JOHN W. BELSHER, ET AL.

Plaintiffs assert that PB was suspended by the State of California Franchise Tax Board (FTB) beginning in November 2018. (Raftery Decl., ¶ 9.) At the time PB’s answer to the complaint in this action was due, it remained suspended. In her declaration in support of this motion, Ms. Carrasco asserts that PB obtained a Certificate of Revivor from the FTB on August 20, 2020. (Mtn., Ex. B.) Thus, at the time this motion was filed, PB was no longer suspended.

  • Hearing

    Jan 07, 2021

COMPASS BANK V. FAIRFIELD CJD, LP, ET AL.

The court is gravely concerned about the information provided by counsel for the Receiver on January 5, 2021, in which it was reported that prior counsel for the auto dealerships sought a power of attorney from the Receiver to negotiate with the Franchise Tax Board to reinstate the auto dealerships during the time that the proceedings were suspended and this motion was continued as a result of the filing of a motion pursuant to CCP § 170.1 by prior counsel for Mr. Hassanally in his individual capacity.

  • Hearing

    Jan 07, 2021

ISLAND ENTERRPRISES INC ET AL VS CITY OF AVALON ET AL

California Secretary of State Certificate of Status for “Catalina Coastal Tours, LLC,” dated June 11, 2020 stating that the entity’s powers, rights, and privileges were suspended by the California Franchise Tax Board (“FTB”) on April 3, 2017 and remained suspended through at least June 11, 2020. 10.

  • Hearing

    Jan 07, 2021

MENDOZA VS. STANLEY

The court will accept internet- based confirmation of active status from the Secretary of State or Franchise Tax Board. THE PARTIES MAY JOIN THIS COURT CALENDAR REMOTELY UTILIZING THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: Join Zoom Meeting https://solano-courts-ca- gov.zoom.us/j/87942237944?

  • Hearing

    Jan 06, 2021

IN THE MATTER OF: WESTERN PROGRESSIVE, LLC

On August 6, 2020, the California Franchise Tax Board (“FTB”) filed a claim to the surplus funds. On August 12, 2020, David Silberman (“Silberman”) filed a claim to the surplus funds. No other claims were filed.

  • Hearing

    Jan 05, 2021

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

IN THE MATTER OF: WESTERN PROGRESSIVE, LLC

On August 6, 2020, the California Franchise Tax Board (“FTB”) filed a claim to the surplus funds. On August 12, 2020, David Silberman (“Silberman”) filed a claim to the surplus funds. No other claims were filed.

  • Hearing

    Jan 05, 2021

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

MASSIS DANIELIAN VS RICHARD DENOGEAN, ET AL.

Franchise Tax Bd. (2016) 1 Cal. App. 5th 247, 257.) California has long interpreted its definition of “cause of action” to be based upon the primary right theory. (Id.) The primary right theory provides that a “cause of action” is comprised of a “primary right” of the plaintiff, a corresponding “primary duty” of the defendant, and a wrongful act by the defendant consisting of a breach of that duty. (Mycogen Corp. v. Monsanto Co. (2002) 28 Cal. 4th 888, 904.)

  • Hearing

    Dec 31, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

RE: REPORT OF STATUS OF ADMINISTRATION PROB CODE 12200

File a verified declaration to show that notice of administration was given to the Franchise Tax Board. PrC § 9202(c)(1) 6. File a verified declaration to include a specific list of assets on hand for distribution, including value of assets on for distribution, description of each bond (with CUSIP numbers), and value of each promissory note. 7. File a verified declaration to specify plan of distribution, including specific list of assets to be held in each testamentary trust 8.

  • Hearing

    Dec 24, 2020

  • Judge

    Fenstermacher

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

TIAA, FSC VS JAMES LASOTA, ET AL.

PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT: BACKGROUND: On April 9, 2019, Plaintiff TIAA, FSC dba Everbank commenced this action against James Lasota and California State Franchise Tax Board for (1) equitable subrogation; (2) declaratory relief; and (3) preliminary and permanent injunctive relief.

  • Hearing

    Dec 23, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

IN THE MATTER OF HELEN SHIELLS KIMBLE

Notice to the Franchise Tax Board was given on 10/26/20, less than 60 days before this hearing. Continue? Subject to a discussion of the foregoing, approve the final account and report. Approve $8,576.46 in statutory fees and $3,186.15 in costs reimbursement to Petitioners' counsel. Approve $2,858.82 in statutory fees to each Petitioner. (Prob. Code § 10805.)

  • Hearing

    Dec 17, 2020

PENFIL V. CITY OF COSTA MESA

Franchise Tax Board (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 367, 383-384 (Bates) states, “The court in Gatto v. County of Sonoma (2002) 98 Cal.App.4th 744, 120 Cal.Rptr.2d 550 examined that line of authority: ‘Exceptions to the filing requirement not specifically enumerated in the Government Claims Act have occasionally been allowed, but only where the claim is based on a statute or statutory scheme that includes a functionally equivalent claim process. Snipes v.

  • Hearing

    Dec 15, 2020

RE: FINAL REPORT ON WVR OF ACCOUNTING & PET'N FOR DISTRIBUTION

Proof of mailing Notice and Petition to Franchise Tax Board who requested special notice 7. Evidence of payment to Property Solutions and Investments for repairs. It appears sale of real property was confirmed by the Court 8-31-18. Petitioner may appear exparte to release funds as needed. 8. Verified declaration by petitioner to show calculation of statutory fee base as required by CRC § 7.705.

  • Hearing

    Dec 15, 2020

  • Judge

    Fenstermacher

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

IN RE THE ESTATE OF LARRY DEE BLOUNT, DECEASED

Petition, item 7: The petition states that no claim was received from the Franchise Tax Board, but a claim was filed by the Franchise Tax Board on December 23, 2019. The petitioner shall clarify. 3. Petition, item 30: The petitioner proposes to distribute the real property at 1313 Second Street, Fairfield in three non-equal shares. Will these shares be held as tenants in common or in joint tenancy? The petitioner shall clarify. 4.

  • Hearing

    Dec 15, 2020

RE: PET’N FOR APRVL OF AMENDED FIRST ACCT & RPT OF SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE,

Proof of mailing to Franchise Tax Board who requested special notice. PrC § 1202 4. Proposed Order Notes: 1. Letters Testamentary issued to Katherine Bowers 6-6-2019. 2. Petition for Probate filed by Deborah Philips is set for 12-17-2020. DEBORAH PHILIPS CHARLES A.

  • Hearing

    Dec 10, 2020

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

MORTGAGE EQUITY CONVERSION ASSET TRUST 2011-1 (AKA MORTGAGE EQUITY CONVERSION ASSET TRUST 2011-1, MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES 2011-1) BY U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION AS CO-TRUSTEE VS ISRAEL GONZALEZ, ET AL.

Bus Cagla, County Of Los Angeles, Orange County District Attorney, Franchise Tax Board of the State of California, Unitrin Direct Insurance Company, Los Angeles County Department of Child Support Services, Tax Collector of Los Angeles County, San Bernardino County Department of Child Support Services, California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, United States of America, All Other Persons Unknown, Claiming Any Right, Title, Estate, Lien, or Interest in the Real Property Described in the Complaint Adverse

  • Hearing

    Dec 10, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

  • Judge

    Maurice A. Leiter or Salvatore Sirna

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

OSAMA ASSAAD VS STATE OF CA DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION

Franchise Tax Bd. (2006) 38 Cal.4th 897, 912.) Meet and Confer The Declaration of Keven K. Hosn reflects that the meet and confer requirement set forth in CCP § 435.5 was satisfied. Discussion Defendant moves to strike the following portions of the First Amended Complaint on the ground that Plaintiff failed to file a timely administrative complaint with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (“DFEH”).

  • Hearing

    Dec 10, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

ELISABETH GIMENEZ VS. AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., INC.,

Franchise Tax Bd. (2016) 1 Cal. App. 5th 247, 256 [citation omitted].) Defendant also argues the economic loss doctrine only permits recovery in tort when a defective product causes either personal injury or damages to property other than the defective product. Defendant reasons that Plaintiff’s fraud claim fails this test because Plaintiff alleges only economic damages caused by the defective vehicle and not personal injuries or damage to other property.

  • Hearing

    Dec 10, 2020

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 72     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.